The High Court has dismissed an application to approve a Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) damages assessment after the claimant rejected it, obtained authorisation to sue and began court proceedings.
Mr Justice Garrett Simons ruled on 29 July 2022 that the assessment was spent once PIAB issued an authorisation following the rejection. It could not later be revived and made binding through court approval.
The case concerns a minor identified in the judgment as Noah Cogley, suing through his father and next friend, Keith Cogley. The claim arose from a road traffic accident. The judgment refers to the child as “the injured child” where convenient.
PIAB notified the child’s solicitors of its assessment on 24 November 2021. It set general damages at €50,000 and special damages at €26,575.32. On 14 December, the solicitors told PIAB the claimant was rejecting the assessment and awaited authorisation. PIAB issued the authorisation that day.
The following day, the solicitors wrote again, saying they had misunderstood their instructions and that the claimant wished to accept the assessment, subject to senior counsel’s advice and a court ruling. PIAB acknowledged the acceptance and asked to be notified of an application for court approval.
Instead, a personal injuries summons was issued from the High Court’s Central Office on 14 February 2022, relying on the authorisation. It was served on the defendant, who entered an appearance. On 11 July 2022, the claimant’s counsel applied ex parte for approval of the assessment.
The court said the PIAB process is consensual and that an authorisation marks its end, allowing the claim to move into the judicial process. Once the claimant had rejected the assessment and PIAB issued authorisation, the assessment could not be accepted retrospectively. The court therefore found the application under section 35 of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 inadmissible and dismissed it.
The ruling addressed only whether the earlier assessment could be revived and approved. The judgment states that the personal injuries claim can now be resolved only in the existing court proceedings; it does not determine the underlying claim.